The Bishop of Ebbsfleet, the Rt Rev Andrew Burnham, is to lead his fellow Anglo-Catholics from the Church of England into the Roman Catholic Church, the Catholic Herald will reveal this week.
Bishop Burnham, one of two “flying bishops” in the province of Canterbury, has made a statement asking Pope Benedict XVI and the English Catholic bishops for “magnanimous gestures” that will allow traditionalists to become Catholics en masse.
He is confident that this will happen, following talks in Rome with Cardinal Levada, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Cardinal Kasper, the Vatican’s head of ecumenism. He was accompanied on his visit by the Rt Rev Keith Newton, Bishop of Richborough, the other Canterbury “flying bishop”, who is expected to follow his example.
Bishop Burnham hopes that Rome will offer special arrangements whereby former Anglicans can stay worshipping in parishes under the guidance of a Catholic bishop. Most of these parishes already use the Roman liturgy, but there may be provision for Anglican prayers if churches request it.
This comment on [url=http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/14073/#245682] Stand Firm:[/url]
[blockquote] I am assured by the Bishop of Richborough, Rt Revd Keith Newton, that his imminent departure to Rome is much exaggerated by The Telegraph. On the other hand, I am equally assured by him that he isn’t just going to hang around for six years waiting for the end.
[11] Posted by John Richardson on 07-08-2008 at 03:07 PM [/blockquote]
So I guess we will have to wait a little longer to see the impact of yesterdays decision, if any.
I cannot take very seriously the claim that a substantial number of clergy is about to become Roman Catholic. I draw your attention to Bp Andrew Burnham’s hope that any move en bloc will allow clergy to continue working in their parishes. But: (a) the buildings will, we may be sure, remain with the Church of England and (b) most Anglo Catholic congregations are, by RC standards, far too small to be viable – so how can a formerly Church of England congregation continue in existence with its priest still at the helm? When some 400 ‘came over’ at the ordination of women, the word they themselves used about their position was brutally honest: they came as ‘supplicants’. This new group seems more inclined to try to bargain. If so, I feel that a shock awaits them. Catholics, BTW, hardly feel triumphalistic.
This feels a bit premature to me, given the fact that nothing was really firmly settled yesterday except what was already fairly clear – that the progressivist/modern feminist coalition in the CofE will stop at nothing to have its social vision established as the raison d’etre of the church. I also think there are many Anglo-Catholics (like me) who have been truly encouraged both by what GAFCON represents and by the Spirit-empowered potential that it reveals, even if we have qualms about aspects of what has been proposed. And with that sense of the renewal of deep commitment to Christ and the Church catholic that GAFCON provides, many of us are willing to wait and work a little longer to see what God can do through a restored orthodox Anglicanism.
Nevertheless, given that their future will be filled with more battles that will see their patristic and scriptural imperatives constantly maligned, and then go undefended by those who claim to be their orthodox allies, it may be time for those CofE Anglo-Catholics who have always felt a stronger attachment to Rome than to Canterbury to finally make the voyage. If that is their calling, may the wind be always at their back and may the Lord hold them in the hollow of His hand.
I do not feel “triumphalistic” – I am always pleased to see people return home to Rome, but this is a sad occasion. The unholy folks who drove them out wound the Body of Christ by what they do, and they have plenty of fellow travelers in the Catholic Church, who had they but the opportunity, would wreck the Catholic Church in just the same way (check Gledhill’s blog – there is a comment there by a Catholic priest who wishes for WO in the Church… he says he is a “priest in good standing,” which he is most assuredly not; he is in fact a formal heretic, but there are plenty like him and I have known several).
We can definitely use orthodox reinforcements – that is very much appreciated.
How can liberal Anglicans who try to suppress the conservatives in that church “wound the body of Christ” when you don’t believe they are schismatics and not part of that Body?
5. Malignancies and parasites wound the Body without being part of the Body.
“he is in fact a formal heretic. . . ”
No, he is not, strictly speaking, a heretic. A heretic is a person who obstinately denies a truth that the Church has declared has been divinely revealed by God. Rather, he denies a truth (male-only priesthood) that the Church has declared to be definitively taught – a slightly lower level than divinely revealed truth, even though the Church could declare the male-only priesthood to be a truth divinely revealed by God (and personally, I believe that it probably is, thoug who cares what I think). This is why Raymond Burke, the recently-resigned Archbishop of St. Louis who is now being detailed to Rome, imposed the penalty of interdict upon a religious sister that was campaigning for women’s ordination, and did not declare that she had been excommunicated. Thus, the priest in question is not a heretic – – but it would seem that he isn’t exactly in full communion with the Church either.
In any event, it seems that the flying bishops haven’t left the C of E just yet, but are preparing to do so at the right moment. As a former Episcopalian turned Catholic, I hope they come over. And I hope that the flying bishops (or reputable bishops from the official Anglican Communion like them) should be placed in charge of any special Catholic canonical structure for former Anglicans – and not anyone from the Traditional Anglican Communion in the United States, which would surely be disastrous!
Re # 7
I believe that then Card Ratzinger at the Holy Office issued a clarification affirming that JP II’s ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS was to be received as an EX CATHEDRA declaration. From the catholic POV this certainly raises it to the position of being irreformable dogma. A point recently reinforced by the announcement of the Holy Office that those pretending to ordain women incur an automatic excommunication.
Of course we Orthodox being a bit less inclined to all the legalese just come out and say it like we see it.
“Yep they are heretics. Moving on…” 🙂
ICXC
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
fee fie fo fum, I smell a troll!